Woodrow Wilson v. State ( 2010 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT NASHVILLE FILED
NOVEMBER 1997 SESSION
February 4, 1998
Cecil W. Crowson
Appellate Court Clerk
WOODROW WILSON, )
) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9611-CR-00485
Appellant, ) (consolidated)
)
) DAVIDSON COUNTY
VS. )
) HON. THOMAS H. SHRIVER,
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE
)
Appellee. ) (Habeas corpus/post-conviction)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
JOHN T. CONNERS, III JOHN KNOX WALKUP
P.O. Box 1451 Attorney General & Reporter
Franklin, TN 37065-1451
LISA A. NAYLOR
Asst. Attorney General
450 James Robertson Pkwy.
Nashville, TN 37243-0493
VICTOR S. JOHNSON, III
District Attorney General
OPINION FILED:____________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20
JOHN H. PEAY,
Judge
OPINION
The petitioner entered a “best interest” guilty plea to two counts of
aggravated sexual battery on August 10, 1989. Pursuant to his plea bargain with the
State, the trial court sentenced him to concurrent twenty year terms of incarceration. The
petitioner took no direct appeal but filed for post-conviction relief claiming that his plea
was not entered knowingly, voluntarily and understandingly, and that he had received
ineffective assistance of counsel in conjunction with his plea. Relief was denied on
February 5, 1993, and this Court affirmed the post-conviction court's action in Wilson v.
State, 899 S.W.2d 648 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). Our Supreme Court subsequently
denied the petitioner's request to appeal.
On March 28, 1996, the petitioner filed for habeas corpus relief alleging that
the act under which he had been sentenced is unconstitutional, and that his sentence is
illegal because it is indeterminate. After a hearing, the lower court denied relief. The
petitioner filed for relief1 again, claiming that he was not receiving the benefit of his plea
bargain and that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel in conjunction with his
plea bargain. After another hearing, the court below again denied relief. The petitioner
once more filed for relief, relying this time on this Court's decision in State v. Roger Dale
Hill, No. 01C01-9508-CC-00267, Wayne County (Tenn. Crim. App. filed June 20, 1996,
at Nashville), reversed, State v. Hill, __ S.W.2d __ (Tenn. 1997). The lower court granted
the State's motion to dismiss. The petitioner now appeals all three orders of the court
below denying him relief.2
1
Initially pled as a writ for habeas corpus, the petitioner subsequently converted this claim for
relief to a post-conviction petition.
2
By Orde rs dated Dec. 11 , 1996, an d April 24, 19 97, this Co urt cons olidated all thre e appe als.
2
Upon our review of the record in this matter, as well as of our earlier opinion
denying the first post-conviction petition filed, we affirm the lower court's actions by order
rather than opinion. All three decisions below were made in a proceeding before the
lower court without a jury, none of the actions was a determination of guilt, and the
evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the court below. Furthermore,
no error of law requiring a reversal of the lower court's actions is apparent on the record.
See Ct. Crim. App. R. 20.
The judgments below are therefore affirmed.
__________________________________
JOHN H. PEAY, Judge
CONCUR:
______________________________
JOSEPH M. TIPTON, Judge
______________________________
DAVID H. WELLES, Judge
3